Hi Daniel, On Tue, Nov 05, 2019 at 04:41:41PM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Tue, Nov 5, 2019 at 4:29 PM Linus Walleij wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 5, 2019 at 1:40 AM Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > > > On Mon, Oct 14, 2019 at 11:43:20AM -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > > > > > > Instead of fwnode_get_named_gpiod() that I plan to hide away, let's use > > > > the new fwnode_gpiod_get_index() that mimics gpiod_get_index(), but > > > > works with arbitrary firmware node. > > > > > > > > Reviewed-by: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > Signed-off-by: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > --- > > > > > > > > Andrzej, Neil, > > > > > > > > This depends on the new code that can be bound in > > > > ib-fwnode-gpiod-get-index immutable branch of Linus' Walleij tree: > > > > > > > > git pull git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/linusw/linux-gpio.git ib-fwnode-gpiod-get-index > > > > > > > > I hope that it would be possible to pull in this immutable branch and > > > > not wait until after 5.5 merge window, or, alternatively, merge through > > > > Linus Walleij's tree. > > > > > > Any chance this could be merged, please? > > > > I'm happy to merge it into the GPIO tree if some DRM maintainer can > > provide an ACK. > > Ack. > > > Getting ACK from DRM people is problematic and a bit of friction in the > > community, DVetter usually advice to seek mutual reviews etc, but IMO > > it would be better if some people felt more compelled to review stuff > > eventually. (And that has the problem that it doesn't scale.) > > This has a review already plus if you merge your implied review. > That's more than good enough imo, so not seeing the issue here? Isn't the issue that the patch should have been picked by someone for drm-misc ? -- Regards, Laurent Pinchart _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
